Are you unknowingly right-wing?

Post Reply New Topic

Not defending the paper but it comes across as his "blog space". You tend to find "The Australian Newspaper" has opinion pieces and articles from the likes of Phillip Adams or Janet Albrechtsen which are largely their opinions and Brody's critique of right wingers is more like they are "wowsers" trying to curtail artistic expression.

Not sure if you remember the bruha created by Kevind Rudd over almost exactly the same issue of child nudity in art
https://www.smh.com.au/national/rudd-v- ... -32n6.html

Rudd is left wing

There was also the matter of James Bennet and his allowance of an "opinion" piece from Tom Cotton to be published in the "opinion" section...

Just because it is an "opinion" piece does not mean it isn't vetted by editors (and legal teams in certain cases) before being cleared for publication, and by being published, this indicates that the publication agrees that what has been said there is acceptable.

Legally a publisher is liable (along with the author) for what they publish, so it's not a case that these people can post whatever they want, unchecked.

Do you expect the NYT to be legally obliged to retract the article and offer an apology? whom are they supposed to apologise to exactly? right wingers? or just the right wingers whom Brody had targeted as "wowsers" in his article?

Let's add this to the list of potential law suites we are waiting on an outcome

That isn’t what was said at all, was it? He merely said that some of the people scandalised by the film are part of the far-right. He didn’t say that only the far-right were scandalised, or that being scandalised makes you far right.

Given that the film is expressly against child sexualisation, it seems rather disingenuous to characterise people who do not want the film to be banned as “pro paedophilia”. The film “Twelve Years a Slave” contains slavery but people who like the film are not pro-slavery!

When you hear excessive talk about child porn it's usually a egoistic virtue signaling.Im not saying child porn isn't horrible but when people speak out against it excessively it's all an ego trip.

It's like people who forever talk about nazi's,it virtue signaling,it's all about self glorification and showing how holy you are.

Both left and right are massive categories.

This show is uncomfortable viewing. Idk if it's paedo or not. I think it has an unfortunate consequence in being, but wasn't intended to be. It intended to criticise the hypersexualisation of kids - the opposite of how a paedo would think. However, the filming of such things in the way listed above might appeal to paedos so it was probably not the best way of going about it (way too sensationalist, not enough about the effects of it later in life).

In my opinion, the media is doing that too much in general and has been doing for a long time. It will show violence or hate speech etc without showing the consequences of such things over time. Paedophilia is something which has long term consequences - should focus on adult victims & interviewing them, talk to their therapists etc. But that wouldn't get all this conversation and 'bums on seats'.

Jimmy Savile was a friend of Thatcher so I don't think the right has a leg to stand on in terms of framing this as a left wing issue. Trump has said creepy things about being let into Miss Teen USA dressing rooms. Liberals can't really criticise the right on it either.

Some things are just 'good person' versus 'bad person' things rather than left and right. Whether you're a nonce or not is one of those things - more about morality than politics.

It's like trying to make cannibalism into a 'left wing issue' or murder in general into a 'right wing issue'.

Depends on their past tbh. If they're former CSA victims, it makes sense. If they're therapists, it makes sense. If they're randomers who are obsessed with it - check their hard drive cos paedos love to talk about this with faux outrage.

If someone survived the concentration camps, it would make sense for them to talk about Nazis a lot. Or if they were the prosecution in the Nuremburg trials.

Yep. Sounds real critical.

Yes this a excellent point,I was more referring to people who don't have reasons for such talk.

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/cuties

Interesting disparity.

Typically, this kind of disparity means "heavy on trendy topics and unwatchable".
The opposite disparity usually means "exploiting old tropes and cliches, enjoyable".

Maybe five years ago. These days it tends to mean that there has been an organised campaign.

Creepy for the sake of creepy then.

I feel the same way when I keep seeing someone talking about how much they hate pedophiles. It makes me wonder about them instead just like how in the closet gays will keep talking about how much they hate homosexuality.

It's all about being unsecured and are afraid to be found out so they think if they keep talking about how much they hate them, people won't know but it's the opposite. Actions says it all.

I think nobody except Bric is making this into a political issue.

The art/film critic (Brody) is expressing his opinion that a work of art-cinema is being attacked by conservative christian types whom he labels as "right wing". I'm not a fan of this type of cinema but if I can understand that this is about curtailing freedom of artistic expression then any other reasonable person will also be able to make this distinction (rather than invoking some mythical secret war against the right wing).